CCMIN072004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Michael Roush provided a summary of the Vineyard Avenue landfill litigation and settlement. Ms. Ayala mentioned that a preexisting agreement provides certain boundaries that the City of Pleasanton has to operate under. She asked if this was correct? Mr. Roush said that is ,correct. The 1986 agreement defines what items can and cannot be recovered through the rate base, but there is some discretion in terms of what the Council can and cannot do. The bottom line is that these are costs associated with the maintenance and the operation of the landfill and that agreement does contemplate that those costs can be recovered through a rate base increase. Mr. Fialho said that staff has attempted to strike a balance between what it believes is fair for Pleasanton Garbage Services while also ensuring that rates for the residential community remain comparable to surrounding communities. The 12 percent adjustment is very comparable to what was approved in July 2000, and at that time, Council approved an 11.7 percent increase. The current recommendation is equivalent to a 3 percent annual adjustment over four years. Ms. Hosterman pointed out that the proposed rate increase is over a four-year period, which equates to slightly over 3 percent annually. Because Pleasanton Garbage Services does not support staff's recommendation, Mr. Fialho said that staff has agreed that staff will meet with Pleasanton Garbage Services on an annual basis to review its annual income and expenditures. If there are any unforeseen deficits, which staff does not anticipate but Pleasanton Garbage Services does, staff will discuss these issues and address them, which may result in a future rate adjustment. Ms. Hosterman asked staff to make the distinction between the service that Pleasanton Garbage Services provides to residents and businesses in Pleasanton and some of the newer programs that have been added in the past year, such as Electronic E-Waste Day and the Food Waste Program, which have been funded through Measure D. She believed that it was important for Pleasanton residents to understand that the rate increase is not relat~l to some of these added programs. Mr. Fialho noted that the City did implement a Food Waste/Expended Green Waste Collection Program. This service has been subsidized with Measure D funds. These funds come from fees that are collected at the dumpsite to help subsidize recycling programs in the county. Ms. Ayala asked who was paying for these fees? Mr. Fialho said the residents and businesses of Alameda County were paying the fees. Pleasanton City Council 14 07/20/04 Minutes